Last night, Windows Phone Centralbroke the news about the new Microsoft branded YouTube app essentially breaking. We investigated the problem and concluded that it was due to a revoked developer key. Such a scenario could only happen if Microsoft forgot to update it or if Google yanked it.

That latter situation implies that Google did not authorize the app and was taking direct action of their own by disabling the video player on all Windows Phones. Indeed, just a few hours ago this was confirmed when Microsoft said as much in a note to the press.

Now, David Howard, Corporate Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at Microsoft, has taken to TechNet, Microsoft’s blog on legal and public policy. Needless to say, the nearly 1000 word statement is chock full of information and more details on the matter, making an excellent read.

HTML5, branding and unfair requests

Presenting Microsoft’s side, which of course is expected to be biased towards themselves, Howard finally gives the details behind the current situation with Google.

It’s noted that for a few years now, Microsoft has been striving for a comparable YouTube experience that is found on the iPhone and Android—something for which we see as reasonable. Redmond reiterated that claim earlier this year soon after Windows Phone 8 launched. Google, however, was reportedly not willing to share certain data with Microsoft on to make that happen. As a result, up until April 2013, Microsoft had a much inferior YouTube experience.

This past spring, Microsoft released their version of a YouTube app and it was very well received by the community. However, Google took issue with it and asked that it be removed. Microsoft obliged with the condition that they can work with Google to release an app of comparative performance with their competitors (iOS and Android).

Microsoft agreed to Google’s terms and in version 3.2 of the YouTube app, released earlier this week, they had enabled Google’s advertisements, disabled video downloads and eliminated the ability for users to view reserved videos.

But there was evidently one more thing Google wanted: the app to be coded in HTML5.

"It seems to us that Google’s reasons for blocking our app are manufactured so that we can’t give our users the same experience Android and iPhone users are getting. The roadblocks Google has set up are impossible to overcome, and they know it." - David Howard
Corporate Vice President & Deputy General Counsel, Microsoft

Microsoft notes that this was an unusual request since iOS and Android are currently not encoded in HTML5 and moreover, after investigating whether it could be done both companies agreed that making an HTML5 app would be technically difficult and time consuming (and perhaps that was Google’s intent).

This was the breaking point as Microsoft decided to release the non-HTML5 version of the app with the intention of returning to the matter later with Google.

Other lingering issues

Other problems that Google cites are ads “based on conditions imposed by content creators” aren’t always displayed. Microsoft claims that they need more data for this, something for which Google reportedly won’t share.

Finally, Google evidently now has a problem with the branding i.e. it seems like an official Google app when it’s made by Microsoft. Another reason is that according to Google, this new app provides a “degraded experience”, something for which most users have not objected too, making it vacuous.

Where to next?

It is clear Microsoft is ratcheting up the PR war by releasing this statement. From their perspective, Google has set prejudicial requirements for Windows Phone that iOS and Android are not obliged to meet. To that end, especially the request for the app to be in HTML5, it does seem that Google here is behaving rather dishonestly.

However, we should note that Google has yet to go into as much detail and surely they have their side as well. Regardless, this dispute has clearly crossed a line and Windows Phone users are suffering at their expense.

I cant belive that, even after having more than 70% Mobile OS market, google are so insecure and afraid of competition that they are behaving like bigtime loosers...Perhaps they are aware that their 'lagdroid' dont have chances to sustain the healthy competition....
GOOGLE .......YOU NEVER HAD ANY QUALITY.....NOW YOU DONT EVEN HAVE REPUTATION...!
SHAME!!!

It makes sense dude,
Both company hate each other. Microsoft always bully Google services(e.g.- Privacy)
I don't know why Microsoft come-up with those apps which always violates Google terms and condition and give them chance to block. and where as Google just need a reason to do this.
Google is not going to make apps unless WP get resonable market shares.
So, I see this is fault from both Microsoft and Google for this mess.
and we as WP users have to suffer.

Don't forget that Google has done everything they could think of to put Microsoft out of business. Google was a search engine that everyone loved until they created Google Docs, now Google Drive and of course Google Chrome. Now Google is being overly difficult. I don't fault Microsoft much on this, they are just trying to stay alive.

Google Docs is a joke compared to Office. There is no evidence that Google's promise of stealing 90% of Office customers has even got started. Microsoft has something like 13 billion dollar businesses. Google can only threaten Microsoft on the mobile front.

And also don't forget that Microsoft also done everything they could to put Google out of business.
Still Google search engine is loved by everyone holding approx 90% market share. Google beat Microsoft almost in every service which provided by both companies.....Smartphone OS, Search Engine, browser etc.....

I am still saying that its both companies fault. Both companies hate each other so much that they don't want to see there existence.

Microsoft always build app which violates Google terms and conditions and Google always going to ban for this.
And we as WP users have to suffer for this

Chrome only beats IE because no one uses IE due to reputation. The only issues I have with IE 10 are with management web pages for network equipment and some really old vBB forums I view, and then I use nets.. i mean firefox :P I just have chrome around for the odd time neither IE or firefox works. They were good till about a year ago and then it just became a crawl to open or do anything and it was always trying to do crap in the background..

I've switched Bing, good for 90% of my searches, the more in the weeds technical searches I still use google.

They aren't better or worse, but for my needs I don't have a pressing NEED for google services. I still use the email, but I never was a big personal email user, so I can take or leave what ever free email I can get.

Well, IE looses to Google Chrome because of support. Take an example of Window XP, which support IE 8 but not 9 &10, where as Google Chrome is available with its latest version which is even better and secure than IE10. So, why use IE when you get a better browser which beat IE in all aspects.
Google Search engine is far better than Bing, I used Bing and leave it. Because search results aren't good as Google search engine neither the presentation of data.
Lets take other services like
YouTube vs. Bing Video
Gmap vs. Bing Map
Android vs. Window Phone
All above services Google beat Microsoft by very large margin.
Why??????
Because Microsoft have a habit of not listening to customers and they provide what they want not what the user want and they are very slow on that too.

I think you're on the wrong forum to say Android is better than Windows Phone.

And MS "not listening to customers"? Are you kidding? I have never seen a company be as responsive to customers as MS has been recently with the XBox One, basically, reversing position on many of their initial plans due to customer feedback.

In contrast, Google makes money from advertisers, not from paying users, which means they don't give a crap about us as end-users, as long as the experience isn't so bad that we stop using them completely. Google is a vile company.

Unfortunately, YouTube, Google Earth, and a few other apps have no equal (at least that I know about), so we go to Google for those. I hope this babyish behavior of rejecting the app and refusing to offer their own causes MS to offer than own alternative to YouTube or some other company to step into the gap.

I am not here to talk about Android.
All I am saying about market shares .
Sorry, to say but Microsoft don't listen to customer......I said this specially for WP.
GDR2 and 3 are full of craps features. We as WP users need basic features which are missing on WP.(Auto-rotate screen on/off option, better brightness control(since battery back-up isn't good), centralised notication etc)
Where as what did microsoft provide -data sense..totally crap.
I don' t know how it is more useful that those basic features.
They might provide some feature in WP blue but ......wait is too long. Microsft intentionally launch half baked OS and they have habbit of provideing those features very slow or might not provide at all.

I would much rather Microsoft take their time and release a feature that is not only useful, but fits with the UI and compliments the OS. Live Tiles serve as a relatively decent substitute for Notifications (obviously not a replacement) there are some really good ideas being thrown around on the WP User Voice.
I would prefer Microsoft work on certain things, but they know best where they are heading and how they can get there. It would be a fools arrand to attempt to appease everyone and as the XBox One fiasco has shown, listening to customers isn't always the proper course of action.

Joe Belfiore at MS has specifically spoken to many of those features and the timing. He has said that they know these are needed and they're working on them. But, he points out, the single biggest complaint from Windows Phone users is lack of apps. The way to get apps is to scale the # of users. That means adding features first that support the hardware needed for broad reach. The 1040 the 520, the upcoming 1080p 5" systems, these all required additional OS support for Nokia and other manufacturers to add the hardware. The 520 is finally causing Windows Phone to reach the masses, which will solve the single biggest deficiency: apps.

This has all been well-covered on this site.

Therefore, I don't believe it's reasonable to conclude that MS is not working as hard or fast as it can, albeit slower than many of us would like, to add key features to is fledgling OS that address the needs of its customers, even its current customers (more scale means more apps).

Hmmmm ...Let's see, Android running on a quad core processors and still lags. Windows Phone running on a single or dual processor and runs perfectly. Half bake my a$$.

Sometimes you have to look beyond the features, and look into what it can do for you. If you are looking for features that a device don't have, then that just mean that the device isn't for you. Plain and simple.

So way the hell are you using WP?! Besides that, Chrome IS NOT better than IE 10 or the new IE 11 in any way, shape or form. I`ve ditched Gmail, Chrome (Wich now SUCKS) and android is next, since im geting the Lumia 925. Remember when google catch phrase was "Dont be evil"??? Those days are long gone and actually google is acting way worst than apple.

It has nothing to do with being an essential tool. If you stop a competitor in one market from accessing your software/platform when you\ve allowed numerous others access for the sole reason that they're a competitor (which is becoming very obvious here) it's illegal and is a breach of antitrust.

Then why doesn't Microsoft make software for platforms like Linux? They make a SkyDrive sync tool for Windows and Mac, but not Linux. Is that anticompetitive?
I'm honestly asking because I don't know for sure.

True and according to Microsoft, they violated them because Google never gave them enough information to enforce them. .Google hasn't said anything more on this issue, so we don't really know their side of the story,

The TOS that Android, iPhone and BlackBerry don't have to follow? Give me a break.
Google is making BS excuses to cover up the truth, otherwise they would be blocking those other OS' because they don't use HTML5 either.

The SkyDrive API is public and can be used by anyone to make a linux version with no restrictions. So it is not the same. MS is also one of the largest contributors to the linux kernel and hold a lot of pattents which they stated they do not want to use. So it's not the same. Linux problem is fragmentation so doing that for linux by MS would mean doing it with source code available which is understandable an issue

It's true that microsoft didn't make any software for linux (let's says, office). But they didn't ban any document compatibility where user of libre office can freely save their work as docx, xlsx, pptx compatible document. Another example was, windows shared folder which can be accessed using samba on linux. They didn't block that too.

Which do you think is more threatening to a business -- a competitor who charges for the work or someone else who gives it away for free? No judgement on the merits of open-source, just that MS has potentially more to fear from free software than a competitor like, say, Apple.

If I opened a burger joint, and a competitor opened one across the street, I'd be concerned and fight for market share, but if third company started giving away free food, even if it sucked, that's harder to beat.

His "never did, never will" is as a-hole as mine....
After all, I just took his troll comment and turned against him, 'cause someone who uses Windows Phone really doesn't have much moral to talk about Linux desktop market share....

Linux isn't really a paid product in the consumer world. It's free. And, Linux users can still use SkyDrive via the Web. And the API's are available, so one can make an app if they want to. But I doubt Linux users want to use a Microsoft service.

Microsoft owns Skype... Which has a public API... Apps like trillian connect to Skype and it works fine. Microsoft makes xbox smartglass for android, ios,windows... Etc... If the iOS app didn't exist... Then YouTube could be android only

anti-competitive?? how?
All users can access it through browsers, and it's not an 'essential' part of any OS/mobile OS.
over that there are dozens of unofficial youtube client already in WP market. google didn't stop them even though most of them are violating google's TOS.

So by that definition Chrome can be blocked on all Windows Desktops.
It's not an essential part of the OS and there is Explorer and Firefox to replace it. But if that were to happen, what do you think Google would say?

That's not the point. The point is that it's clearly not fair to block Microsoft from releasing their youtube app for not meeting requirements that don't apply to ios or android. Just as it would not be fair for MS to block Google Chrome.
Unfortunately, Google can easily afford whatever they would be ordered to pay if a judge found them guilty, and they know it. In the meantime they are hurting the winphone platform which is much more valuable to them in the long run.

That's a valid point. There are non HTML5 third party apps out there. Those aren't being blocked. So how is it anti consumer? Google is blocking an official app made for them and for their customers. There are people who don't want to use an unofficial app, because of problems like with Instagram and this case where it is being blocked. Microsoft is trying to help Google's customers, but they aren't allowing it.

Google doesn't care about me - or other Google fans - who used their products most of our lives and choose, for one reason or another, a different mobile platform.

I was right, a long time ago, when I said to a friend Google is becoming the next Microsoft. I just didn't realize it would be negative. And now Microsoft is making their apps available for other platforms. You can use Skype on all major platforms. Sometimes the app is better on competing platforms. What does Google do? They say we don't care about our customer base on Windows Phone.

Scgroogle ads run on the internet only tech geeks see them and care about them. THey are irrelevent. Youtube is an essential app for any platform. I don't think you can compare the two. MS and Apple have made ads attacking each other too and you don't see MS pulling MS office and Apple still decided to use Bing in ios. Google is just acting incredibly immature and I think its about time MS filed some complaints with the DOJ regarding Googles anticompetative behavior. Maybe that's what MS is doing. They are just gathering evidence to present for an antitrust case.

I think on some level MS is happy to see Google behave the way it does because it gives them more ammunition in their future court battle which there is sure to be. However, they would probably still prefer Google to play nice.

I usually don't have a problem with any vendor and actaully use Gmail and Google Voice as my primary personal accounts. I am even onboard with Google openly saying that they will not develop any of their apps for Windows Phone - it is their decision. But Google throwing a fit about Microsoft developing this app and revoking it just plain turning me off. And I dont even use YouTube on my phone more than once a month.

This makes me think twice about what rules Google want to play with and seriously make me reconsider my decision of using Google Voice and GMail. Who knows they may yank out support for GMail and block MetroTalk some day. Switching from GMail is easy - Google Voice not so much. How much I wish that Skype adds support non VOIP calling like Google Voice does.

Still posting videos to Youtube?
I'm not
so:
Google will pay a HUGE penalty because of breaking the antitrust laws
I think US of A should pay special notice on the privacy issues, too.
Privacy should be only broken by CIA, not a private co.
That should be constitutional

Google is strongly anti-privacy, which is why I avoid Google whenever I can, and CHOOSE to bring my business elsewhere. But users agree to their terms of service when they are foolish enough to use gmail. Google and its users are absolutely within their legal rights to agree to free email service in exchange for data monitoring for targeted ads. That's absolutely not un-Constitutional. The Constitution sets limits on what the GOVERNMENT can do, not what private parties can contract to do. The Fourth Amendment specifically prohibits unreasonable search and seizure and monitoring (aside from what I do in public) without a warrant. That has nothing do with Google's terms.

They may be violating anti-trust laws by blocking MS like this (not clear on the facts with this yet), but that's a whole different issue.

I don't see how this doesn't trigger an anti-trust investigation. The principle of antitrust is to ban abusive behavior by a firm dominating a market, or anti-competitive practices that tend to lead to such a dominant position by means like predatory pricing, tying, price gouging, and refusal to deal. Microsoft, for many years, has been handcuffed on many fronts for this. For example, Microsoft is forced to open up Office API and its proprietary document format to allow third party developing office compatible products, including Google Doc. This is to prevent Microsoft from further dominating the OS market should it choose to leverage one of its monopoly product (office) and intentionally create a sub-bar experience on other platform (by not developing any office product for other OS and not publishing necessary API’s to allow others create substitute products).
What Google did is a perfect analogy of what Microsoft could’ve done but not allowed to do due to antitrust regulation. Google, in order to sabotage the wp platform, it leverages one of its monopoly product (youtube web service), and intentionally create a sub-par youtube experience on wp platform (by not developing a youtube app for wp, AND not publishing necessary API’s to allow Microsoft create a substitute app). It doesn’t matter what excuse google uses, the intention is loud and clear: Google would do whatever it takes, whether it’s unethical or even illegal, to stop wp, or any Microsoft platform, from having a youtube experience on-par with any other platform can offer. It’s clear that Google doesn’t care the consumer experience of the wp users, and they don’t even care their youtube content creator’s value.
Or, Microsoft can take a simpler approach. What if MS offers an OS level ad blocker that blocks all Google ads, or all online ads? Would that pretty much kill Google all together? OK, Microsoft may also lose their own ads business, but if they go into a full-fledged war, which seems to be what Google wants, it’s not a bad deal for Microsoft. I know what you’re thinking. No, it doesn’t necessarily trigger antitrust law suit, as 1) Microsoft doesn’t really block Google service. Users can still use google search, youtube, gmail, most likely with a better experience. And 2) Microsoft can make it user configurable. But I’m not sure, other than the diehard google fan boys, how many users would be willing to unblock the ads.

II guess it is time to Balmer show the MS claws. How about deny the use of their technology (patents) on android? Deny office and other things? How about that? Deny Skype. Deny Office. Google is a kindagarden compared to MS when we talk about patents and know how.

Yeah, that's the problem. The courts have long been biased against Microsoft (particularly in Europe, in my opinion), so if Microsoft did to Google what Google is doing to Microsoft, Microsoft would get fined while Google got told it was in the right for doing the same things.

The problem is that Android has a huge marketshare. Taking things like Office and Skype away from Android would just push more people towards alternatives like Google Docs and Google Hangouts. The marketshare of Android is large enough that this would hurt MS.

I agree. I am finding Google a very poor company though in terms of what they do and there support. We had a company we support go to googles own cloud for emails and documents and when we asked there were there any issues with using there current Microsoft office software and any up coming Ms software we were told no. We then migrated them from there Exchange which granted was very smooth but that is where all the good stops. We have had issues with outlook not minimising when in the Google sync profile but works fine on the Exchange profile, we then had issues with calendar and tasks being shared and when we spoke to Google about it we were then told that it was not googles issue it was an issue with outlook yet it works fine with the Exchange account.
We then went a head and setup some windows 8 pc's that the company wanted and they bought office 2013 with them and we could not get the Google sync installed and again the said that the software dose not work with outlook 2013 and they don't have a way of fixing the issue but they have said if the customer upgrades to 2013 office pro it will work. Now I can't work out why that would make a difference.

In the end we ended up moving them over to office 365 and since then we have not had any issues. For me Microsoft get a lot of stick on the web but I have tried all the other Systems out there and every time I've fond my self falling back to Microsoft Systems as the support is always good and for me anyway there devices just work and work well together for what I need them for.

I hope Microsoft and Google can get this sorted out but I am starting to find my self using YouTube less and less and it would be funny if someone managed to take the market away from them over the next few years but I don't see it happening.

Google apps sync is crap. I had problem with them with outlook syncing, the sync connections is alway dead. I left them and gave them the finger now I have exchange server and all the employees are very happy, sharing calendars, and Contacts with no problem.

As pissed as I am about Google's action, I don't agree with the idea of punishing Android customers for Google's actions. Maybe there is some kind of legal action that MS can take against Google for anti-trust violations of some sort, or anti-competitive actions (I'm not a lawyer). Google is the wrongdoer, not their customers.

i dont use a windows phone. But i agree with you. Google is just doing this because they can. Microsoft even tried to make it so that advertisements worked on the system but they disabled it anyways. Google does evil stuff like this. Locking a competitor out of the game is something microsoft would try.. Google's not above it either.

This isn't something that could legally be considered anticompetitive. Google makes a YouTube app for iOS. That's proof that they'll support rival platforms.
Calling Google anticompetitive for not making a YouTube app for Windows Phone is like calling Microsoft anticompetitive for not making a SkyDrive sync tool for Linux. Both companies chose not to support operating systems that have a small marketshare. It sucks for users of those operating systems, but it's not anticompetitive. There's no law that says you have to make software for every platform out there.

I think the more fundamental problem is that Google is trying their best to keep WP's YouTube experience inferior. Indeed there is no law that says you have to make software for every platform out there. HOWEVER, it is Microsoft who is developing the app, not Google. The "official" YouTube" has been around for a few years. But, why only NOW does Google start raising issues about it? Google didn't do anything to develop the app. But the moment a very good-looking YouTube app appears in the store, they put a roadblock to it. To me, that is a very strong sign of anti-competitiveness.

Yes, it can be.
If was just Google did not wanting to do an app, it was fine, but Google does not let Microsoft creates and YouTube app.
Just imagine Microsoft blocking the Google Chrome in Windows because it was not done using Delphi.
Or someone doing an SkyDrive for Linux and Microsoft ban it because the app wasn't pretty.
This treatment of Google is a lost-lost deal, but Microsoft lost more on this. Google prefers to have less Ad than lost users of Android to Microsoft.
And, for the last, it can be an antitrust action because Google is using a service to monopoly another one. And just remember, there is no “Low range” IOS, but there are plenty of “Low range” Windows Phone.

Its one thing to not make an app for a platform. Its another to demand that they take down the app after a 3rd party went through the trouble to create it and making ridiculous demands that their own app doesn't even have to meet.

Trickym81, you actually stupid? No one is saying google is at fault for choosing not to provide a youtube app (just as MS never provided an office app on iOS), but they are at fault for deliberately pulling an app for little to no good reason.

I'm not saying Google isn't at fault. They're obviously at fault. They're screwing Windows Phone and everyone knows it. I'm also not saying they're not acting in a less than optimal way. Obviously they're being the "bad guys" in this situation. I'm just saying that they're not breaking any laws or acting in an anticompetitive way. People who claim that they have some sort of legal right to a Windows Phone YouTube app are being ridiculous.
Thanks for calling me stupid though. It really added a lot to the conversation.

Ofice is software not a public service like youtube. You can't market something as beeing public to everyone and then doing this. If you have this service public use the same measure for all. So if you ban MS also ban all other apps that use the youtube and allow downloads or whatever. Ban Metro Tube and so on. If you just ban MS from using the service but not the rest then this is anticompetitive

The Microsoft app was called "YouTube." It wasn't called "MetroTube" or anything else. That's the problem.
You think if Google wrote a program for Chrome that worked just like Office and named it "Office" Microsoft wouldn't get upset and demand it be shut down?

It has nothing to do with the name. Google already agreed to let MS use the name. MS clearly states who has copyright on youtube so again no fault here. And remember there are similar cases like opensource LIbre Office, Star Office, etc, etc. MS does not own the name offse. Google demanded to be shutdown because they are anticompetitive. I'm not saying that Google should let MS do native apps because google themself make native apps. That their right to make native apps and not use the API as they own the service. I'm saying you can't block MS and allow the rest of zillion of sites, apps and so on to break TOS. I mean all the apps that download from youtube should be banned. Metro Tube and the likes banned and so on. You are either correct and enforce the TOS to everyone or you are anticompetitive. And the HTML5 restriction is total bullshit and uther bullshit. HTML be it 5, 4, etc whatever version it's just a standard to represent documents in a tree like fashion. It has nothing to do with communication which is done over http protocol. So once I make the http request and get the data who cares how I display the html????? Isn't browser just a program that initiates http request and draws the html on screen? How is not the MS progam a html5 browser? Does it makes http connection? Sure. How it displays the info next is not defined in any html5 standard to enforce that restriction. Is pure lawyer stupidity is simple flash over substance. MS was criticized and fined all the time that they have hidden api in their own operating system that gives them an edge because competition can't interoperate. Years after years MS had to defend itself and explain how they achieve faster loading times in office so competition steal their ideeas and their work just to please the courts. Now google is doing worse because they lie. They pretend they use open protocol say that so you use their service then they screw you. It's not just anticompetitive is pure marketing and PR scam. And they should be made to suffer. But only the people can make them suffer by refusing to use their services anymore.

Its not about making the software, Microsoft made the software within the terms of service and a-hole Google is blocking their access for the SOLE PURPOSE OF COMPETITION. That is anti competitive. Nothing here says they won't make an app, google is blocking an app made by Microsoft but yet let others on this platform exist outside the TOS. You need to actually READ the article.

Except microsoft didn't close the API access to their services like skydrive so anyone interested (if any) can make skydrive sync client on linux. While google blatantly revoke the key to access their API. Well .. It still not illegal though. It just sucks. I clearly don't want to use this kind of service for my personal needs.

The problem is that Google is using its platforms to attack a direct competitor in Microsoft over Bing. The problem is not one where Google is being forced to make an app, but instead allow use of a public API. Why not break MetroTube? Why not break other apps? True, they may allow it if MS doesn't call it YouTube.

That said, I think MS has intentionally engaged in this battle to highlight issues with Google. They do something for their customers that Google refuses to do and Google lashes out. Google's chief also has lashed out at MS for including Google Talk capability in Outlook, even though they made the API public and encouraged it.

One problem is Bing, which has been growing its search share. Another is Outlook.com, an equal to Gmail, and the big one is Office, the juggernaut that Google is trying to make inroads against (Forbes reported at the beginning of this year that Office still controlled 95% of the productivity market). Truth is, Google isn't all that good at converting things from Office and wants greater access to that market because it'll give them more data to sell to advertizers since that is pretty much what Google does.

So they lash out where they can.

I expect them to also lash out at Samsung when they ditch Android for Tizen and attempt to break Google apps for Android's functionality on Tizen.

I can tell you from sources inside the industry, everyone HATES Google, but they need them for now. However, they see a time coming when Google will get theirs.

So why specifically lash out at Windows Phone beyond the other issues? Because you want to thwart growth. Samsung will abandon Android, but not WP. A growing WP8 user base may move more manufacturers over, limiting Android's own growth (actually, Samsung leaving guarantees a massive implosion). You can bet that MS would like to aggressively woo others to the platform. A problem for now is the benefits that Nokia reaps, but those benefits are necessary for the platform to grow. Even so, Android without Samsung, without the bleed effect from them, will be a shrinking platform, not a growing one. Eventually only Moto might be left if the cards can be played right.

Google did indeed make a youtube app for IOS, because at that stage IOS marketshare was bigger than android's. Back then Google/android had a lot to gain. Right now they're trying to keep WP marketshare small by denying WP a youtube app experience that's on par with the android/ios version. They know MS mean bussiness with WP8/W8 and regard them as a potentially seriously dangerous competitor. Unlike their view of BB I guess.

Bot???? Check my profile, been here along time on WPC supertube is fully functional, mytube 1 vid then errors, not trying to sell anything, one caveat I own both apps, don't know if free version of supertube is fully functional but my paid version works just fine, I don't use metrotube so can't comment on that, so Orlok be careful what you spout, alot of WPC members truly do try to help other members

I'm also having intermittant problems with MetroTube and MyTube. Can you confirm that they should not be affected? Some videos work OK, but others will not play (and it isn't the standard, "this video will not play on your device," type of error).